The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
20190809: Tiger Global Private Investment Partners IX, L.P.; Starry, Inc.
20190871: Agnaten SE; Coty Inc.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Noah Joshua Phillips and Commissioner Christine S. Wilson - Regulatory Review of Safeguards Rule
16 CFR Part 313: Privacy of Consumer Financial Information Rule under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
16 CFR Part 314: Standards for Safeguarding Customer Information; Request for Public Comment
20190628: OCP Trust; The Kroger Co.
Crystal Ewing (Health Nutrition Products, LLC)
The FTC filed a lawsuit in federal court to stop a dietary supplement marketer from making misleading claims that its product can help treat and even cure people who are addicted to opiates, including prescription pain medications and illegal drugs such as heroin.
20190813: Amazon.com, Inc.; Aurora Innovation, Inc.
20190819: KKR Americas Fund XII (Dream) L.P.; OneStream Software Holdings Corp.
20190853: Pensare Acquisition Corp.; U.S. TelePacific Holdings Corp.
20190856: The Toro Company; The Charles Machine Works, Inc.
20190869: Mubadala Investment Company PJSC; John Laing Group plc
20190880: Olympus Growth Fund VII, L.P.; Green Equity Investors V, L.P.
20190883: USI Advantage Corp.; USRIG Holdings, LLC
20190891: Twin River Worldwide Holdings, Inc.; Mr. Henry B. Tippie
Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. (FTC v. Actavis)
On 2/2/2009, the Commission filed a complaint in federal district court challenging and agreement between Solvay Pharmaceuticals and two generic drug manufacturers in which Solvay paid for the delayed release of generic equivalents to its own testosterone-replacement drug, AndroGel, typically used in the treatment of men with low testosterone levels due to advanced age, certain cancers, and HIV/AIDS. According to the Commission’s complaint, in an effort to prevent Watson Pharmaceuticals and Par Pharmaceuticals from acquiring patents for their competing testosterone replacement drugs, Solvay paid the companies to delay entry for a nine year period, ending in 2015.
This case was transferred from the United States District Court for the Central District of California to the Northern District of Georgia. The district court dismissed the Commission's complaint, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding that anticompetitive effects within the scope of patent protection are per se legal under the antitrust laws.
On 10/4/2012, the FTC filed a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court. On June 17, 2013, the Supreme Court reversed the 11th Circuit, rejecting the scope of the patent test and permitting antitrust review of reverse payment patent settlement agreements.
There are three related administrative proceedings: